Comparison of the antibacterial efficacy of 810 nm diode laser and photodynamic therapy in reducing microbial flora in patients with peri-implant mucositis - An in vivo study.
{"title":"Comparison of the antibacterial efficacy of 810 nm diode laser and photodynamic therapy in reducing microbial flora in patients with peri-implant mucositis - An in vivo study.","authors":"Poonam Siwach, Reshu Sanan, Abhishek Nagpal, Omkar Krishna Shetty, Amit Bhardwaj, Mukesh Sharma","doi":"10.4103/jips.jips_64_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the antimicrobial effects of an 810-nanometer diode laser, utilizing or not utilizing toluidine blue as a photosensitizer, in the management of peri-implant mucositis.</p><p><strong>Settings and design: </strong>The present study was carried out in 30 implant sites in 15 patients with peri-implant mucositis with a specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. 15 sites were treated utilizing a diode laser (control group) and 15 with photodynamic therapy (test group) in a split-mouth format.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Samples were taken from the gingival sulcus with the help of plastic curettes from control and test sites both at baseline and at 3 months for microbiological analysis.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis used: </strong>Shapiro-Wilk Test was used to check deviation from normality. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyse the two dependent groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intragroup comparison was found to be statistically significant when compared at baseline and at 3 months in the photodynamic (P = 0.001) and diode laser groups (P = 0.001), respectively. No statistically significant reduction in bacterial count was found at baseline (P = 0.1) and at 3 months (P = 0.5) when the diode laser group and photodynamic group were compared with each other (intergroup).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the limitations of the study, it can be concluded that there is a definitive reduction in pathogenic bacteria with both interventions and PDT offers clinically visible benefits in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis.</p>","PeriodicalId":22669,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","volume":"25 1","pages":"40-45"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_64_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the antimicrobial effects of an 810-nanometer diode laser, utilizing or not utilizing toluidine blue as a photosensitizer, in the management of peri-implant mucositis.
Settings and design: The present study was carried out in 30 implant sites in 15 patients with peri-implant mucositis with a specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. 15 sites were treated utilizing a diode laser (control group) and 15 with photodynamic therapy (test group) in a split-mouth format.
Materials and methods: Samples were taken from the gingival sulcus with the help of plastic curettes from control and test sites both at baseline and at 3 months for microbiological analysis.
Statistical analysis used: Shapiro-Wilk Test was used to check deviation from normality. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyse the two dependent groups.
Results: Intragroup comparison was found to be statistically significant when compared at baseline and at 3 months in the photodynamic (P = 0.001) and diode laser groups (P = 0.001), respectively. No statistically significant reduction in bacterial count was found at baseline (P = 0.1) and at 3 months (P = 0.5) when the diode laser group and photodynamic group were compared with each other (intergroup).
Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, it can be concluded that there is a definitive reduction in pathogenic bacteria with both interventions and PDT offers clinically visible benefits in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis.